Williams v. Legan et al
| Jennifer Williams |
| CVS Pharmacy and John Legan |
| 3:2020cv00005 |
| January 2, 2020 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Michael P Shea |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 12, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 8
ORDER: The plaintiff has not responded to the Order to Show Cause [ECF 7]. Accordingly, because she has an identical action against CVS, see 3:20cv4, this case is dismissed. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 2/12/20. (Constantine, A.)
|
|
Filing 7
ORDER : The plaintiff, proceeding pro se, brings this employment discrimination action against John Legan, a CVS manager, and CVS. Based on her financial affidavit, the plaintiff's motion #2 to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. 1915 is granted. Under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B), a district court shall dismiss an in forma pauperis action where it is satisfied that the action is "(i) frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief." With respect to pro se litigants, it is well-established that "[p]ro se submissions are reviewed with special solicitude, and 'must be construed liberally and interpreted to raise the strongest arguments that they suggest.'" Matheson v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Tr. Co., 706 F. App'x 24, 26 (2d Cir. 2017) (quoting Triestman v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 470 F.3d 471, 474 (2d Cir. 2006) (per curiam). Nonetheless, a pro se plaintiff's complaint still must "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Mancuso v. Hynes, 379 F. App'x 60, 61 (2d Cir. 2010) (quoting Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)). The plaintiff, utilizing the Court's employment discrimination complaint form, checked off boxes indicating that she was bringing the action against Mr. Legan and CVS under Title VII, ADEA, and the Rehabilitation Act. The complaint as to Mr. Legan must be dismissed because there is no individual liability under Title VII, ADEA, and the Rehabilitation Act. See Patterson v. County of Oneida, 375 F.3d 206, 221 (2d Cir. 2004) ("[I]ndividuals are not subject to liability under Title VII." (internal quotation marks omitted)); Cherry v. Toussaint, 50 F. App'x 476, 477 (2d Cir. 2002) ("[T]he ADEA precludes individual liability."); Menes v. CUNY Univ. of N.Y., 92 F. Supp. 2d 294, 306 (S.D.N.Y. 2000)("Individual defendants may not be held personally liable for alleged violations of the ADA or the Rehabilitation Act.")That leaves CVS as a named defendant. However, the plaintiff has filed an identical action against CVS which is pending. See 3:20cv0004. There being no reason to maintain a duplicative action against CVS, the plaintiff is ordered to show cause within 14 days of this order why the court should not dismiss this action. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 1/8/20. (Constantine, A.)
|
| Filing 6 NOTICE RE: INITIAL DISCOVERY PROTOCOLS Signed by Clerk on 01/02/2020. (Attachments: #1 Initial Discovery Protocol Form)(Fazekas, J.) |
|
Filing 5
STANDING PROTECTIVE ORDER Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 01/02/2020.(Fazekas, J.)
|
|
Filing 4
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 01/02/2020.(Fazekas, J.)
|
|
Filing 3
Order on Pretrial Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 3/2/2020. Discovery due by 7/3/2020. Dispositive Motions due by 8/7/2020. Signed by Clerk on 01/02/2020.(Fazekas, J.)
|
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Jennifer Williams. (Fazekas, J.) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against CVS Pharmacy, John Legan, filed by Jennifer Williams.(Fazekas, J.) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
